Have your say: Best enthusiast / professional ILC of 2016

Have your say: Best enthusiast / Professional ILC of 2016

2016 was pretty good for high-end ILCs, as we'd expect from a Photokina year. The world's largest photography trade-show is held on every even-numbered year, in September, and this year's show saw major announcements from several manufacturers. But we also saw several high-end ILCs released earlier in 2016, including flagships from Canon and Nikon.

In this poll, you'll get the opportunity to vote for your choice of the best enthusiast / professional ILCs released this year. For the sake of a manageable selection, we've drawn a line here between enthusiast and professional and enty-level / midrange, so the chances are that if your favorite camera isn't listed in this article, it can be found here.

You'll find the poll embedded in the final page of this slideshow, but for now, click through to read more about this year's crop of enthusiast and professional ILCs.

Have your say

Have your say: Best enthusiast / professional ILC of 2016

Canon EOS-1D X Mark II5.6%

Canon EOS 5D Mark IV7.9%

Fujifilm X-Pro26.4%

Fujifilm X-T216.7%

Nikon D50017.6%

Nikon D56.7%

Olympus OM-D E-M1 II13.9%

Pentax K-19.7%

Sony a99 II7.4%

Sony a65008.2%

Total voters: 3,633

Voting is easy - you pick your favorite products by dragging and dropping. You can pick up to three, and rank them in order of priority.

Poll Rules:

This poll is meant to be a bit of fun. It's not sponsored, promoted or paid for in any way and DPReview staff don't care how you vote, so please don't start a flame-war in the comments. I.e., please don't be a troll.

It's fine to vote for the Pentax K-1 products that you haven't used (some aren't yet shipping, after all) but please don't vote for the K-1 purely just to sandbag another product or brand. I.e., please don't be a troll.

Please only vote once, from a single account. Creating and voting from multiple accounts for a community poll of no consequence is a silly thing to do with your time. See points 1 and 2, above, about not being a troll.

Comments

Hasselblad X1D would be my first choice in this category, and the Fujifilm GFX 50S 3rd. I was surprised not to see these since DPReview has both of them listed as 2016 introductions under Cameras. Do we have to wait until 2017 to vote for these?

I haven't got and probably won't buy any of these. I voted for the xt2 as it might be the one I'd most likely to buy were I not heavily invested in another system. Same goes for the K1 at #2. I voted for the Sony A6500 at 3 because it looks to have a lot of good features.

The only camera that I could potentially buy is the OMDEM1 mk2 - and I won't while it's at or near its current price. I didn't vote for it because of its current price. Looks like a great camera, but as you may have gathered, I just don't think it's worth its current price. You may have noted a trend.

Running a 2-Proportion test on 3019 votes and 16.8% votes for the Fuji, and 17.3% votes for Nikon, with alpha set to 0.05%, the 2-P test returns a p-value of 0.6055. Thus, there is no statistically significant difference in the no. of votes betweeen the X-T2 and D500 with a sample size of 3019.

I own Nikon, but only voted for one Nikon in 2nd place (D500). Sony a99II got first spot (12 FPS, 42mp is huge accomplishment to much people ignore). Pentax K-1 is insane value for money (third spot). D500 is in list because it finally brings D5/d4 performance in a smaller and cheaper body. I tested AF and i was wow-ed at how good it is. For the relative affordable 2000 euro, that's great from Nikon. In fullframe Nikon has been slacking to much imo (at least this year).

Canon removes somewhat perceivable gap in the sensor quality, in what I’d regard as "the real-world one", in another category and after the 6d makes another camera that I really like. It takes first place as both d5 and d500 are a bit further for my needs. I ran out of the bars the Alpha 6500 would be next! All of them are fantastic.

As already pointed out, ILC means 'interchangeable lens camera'. There are two sub-categories of ILC, DSLRs and mirrorless cameras (or MILCs). Strangely, many people seem to use ILC to refer to only mirrorless cameras, which is the cause of the confusion.

Maybe because you never heard the term ILC until the advent of mirrorless cameras. (D)SLR's have almost always been assumed to have the ability to mount the lens of the users choice. In fact, off the top of my head I can think of only one slr that has a fixed lens. I have a very clean copy of one. Even in the day of the rangefinder the few models that had interchangeable lenses were still called rangefinders, not ILC rangefinders. A quick glance at wikipedia shows that the term came along at the same time the first mirrorless cameras were introduced. Check out the model # for a Sony a6300. You won't see a "M" in the sequence before ILC.

To each their own, I suppose. I hold firm that the term ILC was coined to distinguish between three types of digital cameras all of which are mirrorless. Point and shoot, bridge, and those that accept different lenses. ITS A GIVEN THAT ALL CURRENT SLR CAMERS ARE CAPABLE OF INTERCHANGEABLE LENSES so to include them with the ILC group is redundant. The case is not the same with all current mirrorless digital cameras, hence the term ILC.

I'd suggest that with the controversy it generates here and elsewhere, DPR is only to happy to stir the pot by referring to a SLR as an ILC when the former was the nomenclature used since they became practical for use by the masses during the early 1960's. If it was good enough for over fifty years, why change it now? Just more click bait, I'm betting.

D500 for DSLR, X-T2 for MILC; great poll! Who would've thought the enthusiast APSC camera still popular in this day & age, when a capable FF camera below 2000 grand already available!...kudos for Nikon & Fuji

Spec/dollar, nothing comes close to the A99II. I mean, it's a 42mp camera that can shoot at 12fps. The only common mantra against is is that it 'lacks lenses'. Seriously, what lens is not available for the A-mount that can't get the job done?

Have you tried it? On paper it looks nice, but after a weekend of use I would stick with a Canon 5Dm4 for wildlife if I would be after a 30+ megapixel. The autofocus didn't feel that good on that camera (with a 300/2.8GII), and the capture/focus priority was not sorted out very well on continuous shooting. It was either waiting for the focus to lock and then capture, or capture wherever the focus was. Canon (and probably Nikon) sorted this out far better.The other issue was with the way it empties its buffer. I only had a 80mb/s SD card with me, but still. After the buffer was full, it took 6-8 sec to write the content to the card, and up until that there were no way to capture the next shot. Canon (and probably Nikon) lets you capture the next shot if there is free space for it, so it is able to continue capturing with a degraded speed even while the buffer is just being emptied.On the other hand I liked that you can set a focus zone (min/max) with any lens, that is cool.

You're right. My digital cameras are all Canon since 2004, but that doesn't mean that I never try anything else. In the last couple of months I was lucky enough to put my hand on many different cameras. Phase one, nikon, fuji, olympus, pentax, sony, you name it. Somehow sony cameras (I tried a7s2, a7r2, a6500 and the a99II) feel unattractive to me, not fun to use. I never had this problem with the XF, D810, D500, D5, X-T2, K1, and just a little bit with the olympus M1II.But still, you're correct, this is my observation, and it reflects how I interact with a camera. Everyone should try out any camera before buying it, and should not rely too much on this kind of lists...

I'll be getting either an X-Pro2 or an X-T2 shortly, like the X-Pro2 better but I hear it may not be so good for those of us with glasses. Always have used Fuji and love their lens lineup. But I believe that in this category it is a tie between the D500 and the K-1. Both have been anticipated forever by a decades loyal fanbase- and both companies delivered. The D500 does what it should do beautifully, for the action/ wildlife photographers it is a great tool, beautifully built and state of the art in the ways it needs to be. And Ricoh could have delivered an adequate full frame package and made most Pentax owners happy but they did so much better. Paying homage in body form to the legendary Pentax 6x7, they stuffed that exceptionally robust body full of goodies such as Pixel Shift, IBIS, lighted control points, astrotracer and much more,,while not shortchanging in the least image quality and practicality. Both are also great options for those not already invested in those systems.

Since the choice is new cameras this year, the comparisons are interesting. But if you are looking for the best camera, period, it seems as though you end up clearly with the Nikon D810 or the Sony A7rII which are both still better overall cameras than any of these. I didn't vote for either of the two flagship purely pro cameras, because all the others are more pro/enthusiast cameras.

I wonder if people who go "it's the best camera, period" have ever even used the camera in question? Or any proper camera at all?

There is no such thing as "best camera, period". And even if there was, D810 is worse that D500 in most aspects except the sensor. It is slower, it has worse auto-focus, it lacks many features and refinements that D500 has. Yet somehow you are still saying it's "overall better". It isn't. It is better for some studio shooters, product and landscape photographers. And even for the latter ones Pentax K-1 offers the better package for less money.

For those that don't need a 36MP sensor, and that is a vast majority of photographers, D810 is "overall" inferior camera because D500 offers much better value for money.

Well I really agree that a lot has to do with the way any particular person would use the camera. But I am reacting from my own use. I have and use the A7rII, D500 and D750 and A6300, but not the D810. Just my opinion, the A7rII is incredibly versatile and with the best overall iq, and by now also, a whole range of great lenses. And since I use it the most, I find its user interface the easiest for me to use. Both it, and the D810 have been out, tested, and are still top of the game. For out and out speed and autofocus, D500 is the best; I think better than the A6300. Did not include the K-1 because I've never tried it, and would not buy it because I would have to buy a whole bunch of lenses, but if I was just starting that might be my choice. Did not include the Canon D5Mk4 because at 30 mp it is, to me, a day late and a dollar short. Did not include the A99II because it gives up a half a stop of light which makes a big difference at the low light end of things.

Because Canon and Nikon don't NEED to release APS lenses. It makes a whole lot more sense to buy their FF lenses, and benefit from using the central sharpest area of the frame. Then, if you want to upgrade, or add, a FF body, you have the lenses already and don't need to buy another set!

Too heavy. And the newest 24-70 from Nikon is even bigger than before. It's awesome looking, but preposterously large. If I had my druthers I would own a Leica M3, two or three lenses, and one of those cool old-school Leica tabletop tripods. Give me a couple of bricks of Agfachome and send me to the Amazon.

Heavy lenses, e.g. manual focus Samyang, Zeiss, Rokinon etc, seem to be gaining popularity, especially among users of relatively compact and lightweight Sony mirrorless cameras, despite this making them front heavy and awkward (in comparison to when used on a DSLR).

Yet, some users of relatively large and heavy APS Canon and Nikon cameras seem to find even "normal" weight FF glass too heavy.

I'm not taking sides here. We all have different wants and needs, but it does make more sense if there is ANY possibility that you might someday go full frame, to get FF lenses in the first place, does it not?.

A99ii even though I have not used one yet and the reviews are not out either. It promises to be both a resolution DR monster for landscapes and a sports/high performance camera at the same time. None of the others in the list can claim to be both.

I only have two problems with the A99II. First, the lens selection is sub par vs the competition (or overpriced depending on how you look at it) and second, the questionable commitment to A mount. The A99II is similar to the Samsung NX1 in that regard..... awesome camera but falls short with the overall system.

In terms of commitment, Sony a-mount has released a new body almost every year despite the fact that they only have two or three model designations. Their holy trinity of lenses just got updated recently. It only pales in comparison to Sony's flurry of activity in e-mount, a newer system. Compared to Canikon who have much higher number of models, the "commitment" shown is comparable.

In terms of the lens system, Sony has two lines of lenses for the a-mount: a lower priced consumer line and a higher priced za and g pro line, just like Canon's L and non-L lines. As for third party support, Tamron has most and Sigma have many of their best lenses available in a-mount, as do Samy/Roki. Aside from specialist tilt-shift which everyone except for Canon seems to lack, you can build just about any practical combo for a lens system in different price points for the a-mount. Not to mention older Minolta lenses which can come cheap in the used market if one is into that.

I'm familiar with the A mount lens choices but I think you're confusing having a lens selection with having a lens selection that is competitive or at least makes an effort to be competitive with Nikon and Canon. Sure you have quite a few lenses to choose from but there is little consistency and outside of the updated versions of the same lenses no new lenses added. Nikon has added a number of excellent f1.8 primes, a 200-500, f4 lenses, and refreshed some older lenses and Sony has added? Again, I'm not saying you can't piece together an acceptable kit if you're invested in A mount or if you like the A99II that much but otherwise it isn't a great place to go to build a system. Minolta lenses were already old and they aren't getting any younger. A mount would be an even bigger disaster if the 3rd party companies weren't turning out a few decent lenses. I don't expect Sony to keep up with Nikon & Canon but there is a big difference between doing nothing and keeping up.

I do wish that Zeiss offered its Otus and Milvus lines in a-mount. Which might be reason enough for a high budget fine art photographer to prefer d810 or 5dsr to a99ii. It seems that there was a prior arrangement between Zeiss and Sony to limit Zeiss involvement to the za lens. However, we now see that Zeiss has Loxia and Batis lines in e-mount while Sony still releases za lenses in e-mount. So who knows, Otus and Milvus versions in a-mount in the future?

Since we are requested to vote for camera's we've used, I voted for the only 3 camera's I have used. K-1 and X-Pro2 (quite extensively actually) and X-T2 (only played with it on the Kina (but was impressed enough...)

Explain how you decided to go from 3 ultra-high resolution FF bodies to being content with a 24MP APS-C that has its resolution further penalized by its non-conventional colour-filter array?

I'm just surprised by the thought process that would lead from any of those 3 cameras to the Fuji. Surely the A7 II, D750, or 5D IV would have been better suited for your needs if the 24MP X-T2 was your ideal choice in the end.

Fuji's lenses are only exceptional when compared to Sony E-mount. Nikon and Canon FF, M4/3, and even Sony A-mount all have more complete lens lineups, so that doesn't sound like a valid reason to me, either.

Fuji is the Leica of the 21st century! Hardly, their lenses aren't absurdly overpriced that are more about snob value than sheer excellence, even though Leica lenses are very good and beautiful, so are many much cheaper alternatives.

I don't own any of them, I shoot event photography and they are provided for me by the company I work for. The cameras I listed are all excellent, but the Fuji experience (just my opinion) is superb. I love the dials, the feel of the body, the lenses which IMHO best the group and of course the image quality, I can't get such lovely color from any other model with heavier LR work.

Even though I would not personally want to use any of these cameras, this was my order for a professional audience:

1) Canon 5D IV2) Nikon D5003) Fuji X-T2

If someone is paying me, I'll suck it up and use the camera that I think will get me the results that I need in the most versatile situations, even if I don't enjoy using it and would never pick it for personal use.

Value for money is a big factor. I think the E-M1 II does things that none of those cameras can, but it costs a lot, and does have some liabilities in low-light performance.

Realistically, I would just get a D750 and forget about it, but that's not a 2016 camera, so it's not in the listing. Probably hands down the best prosumer camera for the money, though.

if value is important Pentax K1 is the best value camera in the world IMO and has even better IQ than D810 and I'm not a Pentax user at all. Alas Canon, Sony and Nikon were not in the least swayed by it's excellent value in pricing their own cameras.

I would be happy to own any of the cameras in the list, but the one that piques my interest the most is the Sony A99II. If they offered this in an EF or F mount they would sell a million. Too bad it's limited to A mount.

Just try to ignore for a moment that the E-M1 II is a 4/3 camera and you can't vote any other camera for number 1. This is the reference body now when it comes to innovations and features.This is coming from a Fuji owner btw

As much as I like E-M1 II (hell, I have ordered one and I am getting back into MFT just for that camera), I don't fully agree. I have voted it #1, but I can easily see why some people would not. A good camera is not only about innovations and features alone. Limiations of the MFT system must be taken into an account. Price must be taken into an account. Offers from the competition too. Both D500 and Fuji X-T2 are absolutely terrific offers that are well worth the spot at the top as well, even though to me E-M1 II is the king of the year.

I have seen it. No, it's not "HELL and Mid East" (whatever that is supposed to mean). It's typical performance for an MFT camera. Slightly worse than an APS-C and substantially worse than a full frame. I don't know why would one expect anything else. It's nothing I can't work with and I have successfully shot much worse performing cameras with great results. I don't buy E-M1 II for best image quality, it's got others things to go for.

I have a multiple prints made with best APS-C, best FF and one of the best m4/3 cameras, prints made to A3 size and all cameras taken in exact situation and settings.

Low light ISO 3200 and day light ISO 3200. And there is no difference between 4/3" and 35mm sensor when it comes to noise quality.

It ain't just my opinion but seven other professionals and dozens of average camera consumers who couldn't tell the 4/3" sensor being worst (actually ranked it second best by image quality, or best, in total blind test).

E-M1 offers what all others do as well, until you hit to internet arguments of hyperboles that every camera would need to meet (like 120" print viewed with magnification glass and taken at ISO 25600).

The real world tests speaks totally otherwise than gear heads and pixel peepers at dpreview.

@Tommi K1, well, you are right about the prints, but in general the difference in noise is objective, so I would not say "it offers what all others do as well", because it doesn't. I won't be able to shoot my soon to be shipped E-M1 II at 12800 like I can my Nikon D750 and get acceptable results. It would also be quite silly to compare something like D810 (or K-1) and E-M1 II for stuff like product photography - there's simply no competing with nearly zero base noise of D810 and the ability to further eliminate it by downsizing the images. Some people need that (emphasis on "some").

However, I fully realize E-M1 II is not supposed to compete with D750, and sensor performance is not the only thing that makes or breaks the camera, especially when MFT performance is really decent. I recognize its other strengths, speed, versatility, convenience and features that neither my D750 nor D810 provide me with. This is what people who like to argue on the internet fail to realize.

@Melchiorum But it does, until you go over the limit. You can get identical quality with 12800 as D750 all the way to specific size print where the difference becomes visible when you _compare_ the photos side by side. Put the prints on the different walls and you don't again see a difference.

If you want nice 12" prints, 12800 from m4/3 is like it from D750. If you want ISO 12800 and 60" print, then there is visible difference.

That is why m4/3 cameras can do what every big camera can do about noise performance, as A4 is usually the largest print that people need. That is size of a magazine page in most cases. And A3 is already the maximum people would need for two page in magazines (two A4 sizes). And that is with ISO 3200!Now lower the ISO and you can radically increase the print sizes to 40-50" (think about TV sizes) without any problems (this is for glossy photopaper, not for matte paper or canvas where you can go over 100" already).

Well, the fact is that "the limits", as you call them, are very subjective and noise performance is not. I can come up with my own "limits" and say that my phone can produce just as good image as a Nikon D810. And that would be completely true in certain "limits", such as tiny instagram images. But that would mean nothing.

Arguments like "MFT is crap, because its noisy" are very silly. But it is just as silly to say that "MFT offers what others do" in comparison to full frames. It doesn't. And it probably shouldn't, because it uses its limitations to offer much more in other areas. So how about we just get to shooting and stop worrying about gear and specs and low light noise? I know I will. Peace! :)

They can't offer a camera compatible with EOS or FX because they'd get into a s***load of legal trouble with either Canon or Nikon. Their electro-optical systems are protected by patents. The closest they could get is to either refloat something like FD, C/Y or MD mount, or make a Pentax alternative (K-mount is open, or at least the mechanical specification is).Just what lens is it that you need? A-mount lenses cover most standard and not so standard photographic situations.

The Nikon D5 and Canon 1D should not even be on this list. For pros working in the field, they're the only choice (and by "field" I don't mean your toddler's birthday party on the back lawn, but rather wars, earthquakes, floods etc.)

The rest of the cameras are for us common mortals, and what nice choices there are.

Yeah, the problem is that if they were on a different list, they'd be the only two cameras eligible, and people would choose their favourite either on a fanboy basis, or because they are already heavily tied to either C or N.

These professionals dont want substandard gear to prevent them from taking the right photo at the right time. They want the gear to get out of the way so they can take that photo in the war zone or Usain Bolt making a record winning dash. Those arguing that their niche alt gear is just as good as true pro grade gear are those that are most fixated on gear.

I think this is a good point - grouped into this list, people simply won't vote for the D5/1DX. Honestly, these flagship bodies cost twice or even four times what other flagships cost, and have very specific targets - they simply don't need or warrant an award like this one.

A very easy decision. Nikon D500. Image quality as good as many full frame cameras, lighting-fast and very accurate AF and subject-tracking, articulated screen, good ergonomics, potential very high durability, good value, and (jointly with Canon) the best overall range of lenses in the business. What more could you want?

Then put FF glass on your Canikon, so you can take full advantage of the central sharpest area. And if/when you upgrade to FF, you already have the best glass. Not much point buying expensive high-grade APS glass if you have to dump it if/when you go FF.

I agree with the OP on most but I personal not a big fan of D500's ergonomics, I found it pretty bad when comparing all all my 1-sereis and D3 even with the vertical grip, the grip just too small it shapes a little too "pointy", and without vertical grip, Canon 5D sereis feels much more comfortable in my hand.

Dan_168 -I agree entirely that Canon ergonomics are better than Nikon - that's one of the reasons why I use Canon myself. Better controls, more comfortable in the hand, better menus. But, that's a personal view - I'm sure there are at least as many people who prefer the Nikon approach.

The A6500 feels very out of place here... it's like it got lost looking for the enthusiast poll :-/The K-1 is duplicated, but it only belonged in this poll, in my view. It's too much dough for a midrange model.I'm surprised at the popularity of the E-M1 Mk.II, in my mind it is soundly defeated by the X-T2 - it offers better raw IQ, more high-end lenses, excellent video, and it costs significantly less.But the true winner here should be the A99II - it does most of what the competitors do, moves the largest amount of data the fastest, has a number of features not replicated anywhere else, shrunk in size quite a bit, and is as close as one can get to a "perfect" camera for $3K. People will say that A-mount is dead, but the lenses are very plentiful and cheap, and if one doesn't have very niche lens requirements, everything is covered.

Yep, the Sony a99ii is a camera that deserves a great deal more attention than it gets. Sony should kick their marketing division up the rear, and get them promoting this camera properly. The shortage of modern A-mount glass is frustrating, but virtually all bases are covered by Sigma.

I voted D500 as first place. I put Sony a99ii in second place, and because I'm a Canon lover I put the 5DMkiv in third place.

The X-T2 has excellent UHD and 1080p, just read the reviews here. The Olympus Cinema 4K is something the Fuji doesn't have, and is really good, but on "standard" 4K the X-T2 is better.And I'm sorry, but yes, Fuji has a number of lenses unequaled on MFT. They're expensive and large, but still fantastic. The 16mm f/1.4, the 14mm f/2.8, the 56mm APD - and perhaps more importantly, the 2x teleconverter. Heck, even the 18-55mm f/2.8-4 has an important light gathering advantage and is bog standard and cheap.Olympus does have the PRO fisheye, the 60mm macro, and 300mm f/4 to their advantage, but Fuji has competitors planned for two of those coming out this year.

I would have put 5D4 3rd if priced $500 less. I put K1 first for sheer value and excellent IQ, A99II for specs and D500 for being best can do anything crop camera. I've looked at E-M1 II AF and IQ and it does not match the D500 and above ISO 1600 it gets smashed. At $1400 it would have done a lot better. Fuji XT-2 is almost perfect and if it had the AF capabilities of the D500 it would have been #1.

Canon's problem with the 7DMkiii (if they bring it out) will not so much be matching the D500, as competing with the Olympus E M1 Mkii, which is certainly the closest competitor to the D500 at the moment. It wouldn't surprise me at all, if Canon brought out a mirrorless sports camera now, rather than a direct 7DMkii upgrade.

entoman,"It wouldn't surprise me at all, if Canon brought out a mirrorless sports camera now, rather than a direct 7DMkii upgrade."my guess is Nikon will do this.They still didn't ship DL cameras thou.And If rumours are true I guess they are gonna use NX mount.

Yes I agree...Like Kodak's mistake for film cameras,they don't want to kill their own entery level market.But they will lose at the end (not my hope but just guessing).They were giving little by little (especially about fps),but nowadays almost any mirrorless can surpass their flagship cameras.I know they are still a little bit behind,but not hard to see what is on the horizon!

@Xentinus, yeah Canon or Nikon can do whatever they like to "protect" their SLR market, it's their business, perfectly fine with me, I have now a Sony A7R II and Fuji X-T10 and will upgrade to X-T2, I am so glad there is more than two camera manufacture in the world, LOL. But I still use 1Dx/D500 for a lot of stuffs other than landscape, so mirrorless and DSLR can co-exist for a long long time and I will use both of them, just not necessary from the same manufacture.

At this level of camera diversity, quality and price it seems pointless to choose a "best." And, both the Canon 1D X II and Nikon D5 are cameras that belong in a category of their own. Even then, a "best"? It's a personal decision, as it should be.

Sure, this is fun, but more to the point is to keep DPreview as a POP for Amazon. Not objectionable, after all DPreview is fun for all of us and the folks working there need to be payed. I guess it is the obvious marketing in having a "best" competition that seems so out of date. Reminds me of the "best restaurants," etc., runoffs promoted in alternative newspapers in order to draw both advertising and readers. An effortless way to get attention.

But I won't be a stick in the mud. I'll vote for the most underserving: As a Sony user I am continually frustrated by Sony's BS, such as insisting on the lossy compression ARW format. Boo. So I vote for the Sony a6500 as the least deserving of the bunch (yeah, I may get it anyway, sigh.)

At this level of camera diversity, quality and price it seems pointless to choose a "best." And, both the Canon 1D X II and Nikon D5 are cameras that belong in a category of their own. Even then, a "best"? It's a personal decision, as it should be.

I think it all depends on how you use those camera, each camera can excel in different category. Like you don't need to own all the camera on that list to know 1DxII and D500 is much better camera than those Olympus or Pentax if you mainly shoot sport, you don't need to own all the camera to learn a FF sensor has better high ISO performance if you mainly shoot at high ISO.

Very difficult pick this one. To my mind Oly is the best out there all things considered (all things that matter to me that is), but the price....D500? X-T2? K-1? All pretty different, all with their own strengths...I feel the K-1 is severly underrated by dpreview especially. It is not a pro cam because...of its price??? I'd say D500, EM1mk2, X-T2, K-1 and of course D5 are all professional cams that will do very well in all situations (one better here, the other there etc).

Oly specs are great but that little sensor can't beat even the APS-C sensors. It's way behind the D500/XT-2/a6500 at high ISO, and it's AF can't match the D500. If the price drops $500 I might replace my E-M5 with one though. In Australia the Oly is an absurd $2900 or so. Almost double what the M1 cost. I can get the D500 easily for $2400.

This is the toughest category, not a bad camera among them and most are exceptional in some way; it will come down to which exceptional features means the most for a given user.

Trying to be objective, the one that impressed me the most is the Pentax K-1. The sheer number of useful features built on the back of sensor based IBIS soundly trumps the competition; AA simulation, horizon correction, Astro tracking, superior pixel shift resolution implementation, all wrapped up in a fairly compact feature packed body.

Best of all, in a year that will be remembered as the year many ILC manufacturers added 40% to the cost of their flagship, the K-1 bucks the trend and puts value for money front and center.

I doubt it will have the popularity to win against the bigger names, so I'm just using the comment as a chance to say well done Ricoh/Pentax, Bravo.

Yeah, I think it deserves top spot. We all expected the D5 but the D500 gave us something a little bit special. I like many of the cameras mentioned but I don't think they are as complete a package as the D500 is.

Well yeah, hard to argue with photos like that. But as good as the D500 may be, it's always the eye behind the lens who is making the shot and that's stands out even more than the fantastic IQ. Great body of work and a pleasure to look at.

More about gear in this article

Olympus has announced updates for its OM-D E-M1 Mark II, OM-D E-M5 Mark II and Pen-F cameras in the lead up to CP+ 2018. On the list of updates are improvements to the E-M1 II's Pro Capture Mode, and the addition of in-camera Focus Stacking in the E-M5 II.

Dan and Sally Watson over at Learning Cameras put the Nikon D850, Sony a7R III, and Canon 5D Mark IV through their paces, testing all three cameras for everything from skin tones, to dynamic range, to autofocus tracking and more.

Latest in-depth reviews

The Fujifilm X-H1 is a top-of-the-range 24MP mirrorless camera with in-body stabilization and the company's most advanced array of video capabilities. We've tested the X-T2's big brother extensively to see how it performs.

Panasonic's Lumix DC-GX9 is a rangefinder-style mirrorless camera that offers quite a few upgrades over its predecessor, with a lower price tag to boot. We've spent the weekend with the GX9 and have plenty of thoughts to share, along with an initial set of sample photos.

Panasonic's new premium compact boasts a 24-360mm equiv. F3.3-6.4 zoom lens, making it the longest reaching 1"-type pocket camera on the market. We spent a little time with it; read our first impressions.

Latest buying guides

Quick. Unpredictable. Unwilling to sit still. Kids really are the ultimate test for a camera's autofocus system. We've compiled a short list of what we think are the best options for parents trying to keep up with young kids, and narrowed it down to one best all-rounder.

Landscape photography isn't as simple as just showing up in front of a beautiful view and taking a couple of pictures. Landscape shooters have a unique set of needs and requirements for their gear, and we've selected some of our favorites in this buying guide.

If you're a serious enthusiast or working pro, the very best digital cameras on the market will cost you at least $2000. That's a lot of money, but generally speaking these cameras offer the highest resolution, the best build quality and the most advanced video specs out there, as well as fast burst rates and top-notch autofocus.

Are you a speed freak? Hungry to photograph anything that goes zoom? Or perhaps you just want to get Sports Illustrated level shots of your child's soccer game. Keep reading to find out which cameras we think are best for sports and action shooting.

At this year's CP+ show in Yokohama, we sat down with senior executives from several major manufacturers, including Canon. Topics of conversation included Canon's ambitions for high-end mirrorless cameras, and the importance of responding to the demands of the smartphone generation.

We were recently able to follow local frame builder Max Kullaway as he created one of his AirLandSea bikes. Here are our picks of the photos we got, as the project progressed from bare tubes all the way to rideable bicycle.

On paper, the Sony a7 III is a tempting option for photographers who've been considering a switch to full-frame mirrorless. But how does its image quality stack up? We compare it to the Mark II and a few of its other peers.

Google Lens uses artificial intelligence and 'computer vision' to identify and provide information about businesses, landmarks and other objects using your phone's camera. And now it's available for iPhone users, too.

In the job posting, the Times' describes this role as "one of the most important and high-profile jobs in visual journalism." If you're looking for a high profile job in photojournalism, you could do a lot worse than being Photo Director at The Gray Lady.

According to a recent report out of South Korea, Samsung is increasing production of its ISOCELL image sensors in a bid towards market leadership for image sensors. To reach this goal, Samsung will have to dethrone current market leader Sony... no small task.

In this video, large format photographer Ben Horne shows off the incredible resolving power of 8x10 slide film by pixel peeping a massive 709.6-megapixel drum scan of one of his landscape shots. And you thought 100MP medium format was big...

Photographer Wendy Teal tells the heart-breaking story of a wedding she shot at a hospital on just 24-hours notice. The mother of the bride had been given one week to live, and Wendy responded to the couple's desperate social media plea for someone to capture their special day.

Syrp has announced the Magic Carpet Pro: a slider that offers filmmakers an 'infinitely extendable' range thanks to built-in track levers that let you connect lengths of track without the use of tools.

At CP+ we sat down with executives from several major manufacturers. Among them was Kenji Tanaka, of Sony, who talked to us about the a7 III as well as its plans to attract more pro shooters – without ignoring APS-C and entry-level customers.

How do you shoot macro photography on an 18x24cm large format wet plate camera? You 'connect' two large format cameras together! That's how wet plate photographer Markus Hofstaetter did it, and you can read about the whole process in this article.

The Fujifilm X-H1 is a top-of-the-range 24MP mirrorless camera with in-body stabilization and the company's most advanced array of video capabilities. We've tested the X-T2's big brother extensively to see how it performs.

Motorsports photojournalist Jamey Price recently flew to Canada with Lamborghini for the car company's Winter Accademia 2018, where clients get to drive the latest Lamborghini supercars on snow and ice. Yes... it is exactly as awesome as it sounds.

For the Pixel 2 smartphone's Motion Photos feature, Google built on its existing Motion Stills technology by adding advanced stabilization that combines software and hardware capabilities to optimize trimming and stabilization.

"After his camera was stolen from his room in the orphanage, he switched to an iPhone for his photography, reasoning that the image quality of a big, heavy camera was less important than the freedom of a cell phone. 'Quality? Screw it, I’d sketch things with a pencil if I could draw,' he wrote in a blog post."

Chinese manufacturer Vivo has announced some AI-powered Super HDR tech to compete with Google's HDR+ system. Both systems combine multiple images to create a final shot with more dynamic range and less noise, but Super HDR claims to do so more intelligently.

The 'semantic image segmentation model' categorizes every pixel in an image and assigns it a label, such as “road”, “sky”, “person” or “dog.” And now, Google has released its latest version as open source, making it available to any developers whose apps could benefit from the tech.

Fuji's latest firmware update for the GFX 50S adds two new features: a focus stacking mode, and a 35mm format mode that takes 30.5MP photos using the center portion of the camera's medium format sensor.

The crash has raised serious questions about 'startling safety gaps' in the doors-off photo tour industry. After a brief safety video, passengers are strapped in with heavy-duty harnesses and given only a knife to cut themselves loose in case of emergency.

For the first time in five years, Adobe is raising the price of some Creative Cloud subscription packages. The good news for photographers: The $10/month CC Photography plan that includes Photoshop CC, Lightroom CC, and Lightroom Classic CC will stay the same.